Disaster aid is no place for politics

Published 6:46 pm, Friday, January 4, 2013

The delay in passing a multibillion-dollar relief package to help victims of Hurricane Sandy apparently came as a shock to many observers, but it shouldn't have. This has turned into something close to standard operating procedure with the current Republican-led Congress.

In May 2011, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor led a charge to withhold aid to victims of a tornado in Joplin, Mo., which devastated a wide swath of land and left more than 100 people dead. No bill could be passed, he said, until offsetting spending cuts were found. This was supposed to serve as a display of fiscal sobriety in an era of runaway spending, but in fact became a lesson in how not to run a government.

Emergency relief is, by definition, time sensitive. People are in need of help immediately. This was true in Joplin and is true today for large parts of the East Coast.

It's true, not all the money in any aid package will be spent overnight, but that's mostly because the job of rebuilding a shattered community is not a simple proposition.

It's also true that relief packages, like almost any bill, can be loaded down with seemingly unrelated provisions. That's a practice that should be stopped; it's not a reason to fight the delivery of emergency aid.

The Sandy funds were finally appropriated after the New Year because the last Congress ended its session without taking up the question, bringing down the wrath of not just Democrats but of many Northeast Republicans, including New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie. Their outrage was baffling, given that their party has made clear that even disaster relief, like the debt ceiling, is just another political football. Only the nationwide furor at holding up the hurricane bill forced the hand of Congress.

This is no way to run a government. Even with rampant polarization, there must be some places we can come together, and offering help when disaster strikes is supposed to be one of those times, no matter the circumstances.

There are cuts to be made in federal spending. Emergency relief is not the place to make them. Somehow, that's become a controversial view.